Evidence

United States v. Wright — Study Notes

United States v. Wright, 47 F.4th 1092 (9th Cir. 2023)

Study notes for United States v. Wright: professor notes, cold call prep, exam angles, and memory aids.

Evidence obtained through government sting operations may be inadmissible if the defendant was induced to commit a crime they were not predisposed to commit.
Professor Notes

In United States v. Wright, the Ninth Circuit addressed the critical issue of entrapment within the context of a government sting operation. The court highlighted that undue influence by law enforcement can lead to a dismissal of evidence if a defendant is found to be not predisposed to commit the crime prior to government involvement. This decision underscores the importance of balancing law enforcement interests against the rights of individuals to ensure that convictions are based on voluntary criminal behavior rather than coerced actions. The ruling illustrates the standards of what constitutes entrapment and the intricacies involved in distinguishing between proper law enforcement tactics and those that constitute wrongful inducement.

The court emphasized that the focus should be on whether the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime and if the government agents' actions crossed the line into inducing criminal conduct. These factors are essential for law students to understand, as they inform both the legal standard applied in entrapment cases and the evidentiary implications of police conduct in sting operations. Students should consider how this case fits into the broader landscape of entrapment jurisprudence and what implications it may have for future cases.

Cold Call Prep
  1. 1Explain the entrapment defense and how it applies in this case.
  2. 2Discuss the criteria used by the Ninth Circuit to evaluate inducement by law enforcement.
  3. 3What are the implications of this ruling for future sting operations?
  4. 4Detail the significance of predisposition in the context of this case.
  5. 5Identify other Supreme Court cases that address similar entrapment issues.
  6. 6What practical considerations should law enforcement agencies take from this case?
  7. 7How might the facts of this case affect its outcome on appeal?
Mnemonic Device

P II - Predisposition Induced by Investigation

Distinguish From
CaseDistinction
Jacobson v. United StatesIn Jacobson, the defendant was found to be predisposed to commit the crime only after extensive government interaction, making it clearer that undue inducement was at play.
United States v. RussellIn Russell, the focus was on the government's provision of essential means for committing the crime, whereas Wright centers on the issue of inducement and predisposition.
United States v. McAndersonMcAnderson dealt with the timing of government involvement in a criminal enterprise, while Wright specifically addresses the intentional coaxing aspect of government actions.
Policy Arguments

For the Rule

Preventing entrapment protects individuals from being manipulated into committing crimes they would not have otherwise committed, preserving fairness in the legal system.

Against the Rule

Limiting law enforcement's ability to conduct sting operations may hinder efforts to combat organized crime and drug trafficking.

Class Discussion Points
  • Should there be stricter regulations on how law enforcement conducts undercover operations?
  • How do cultural perceptions of law enforcement influence the public's view on cases like Wright?
  • Discuss the balance between law enforcement tactics and individual rights in the context of entrapment.
Exam Angle

When addressing exam questions on this case, students should focus on the delineation of entrapment and the factors that determine predisposition versus inducement. Be prepared to analyze the legality of law enforcement tactics in sting operations.

Ace Your Cold Calls with Briefly

Get AI-powered case briefs, study notes, and cold call prep for every case in your casebook.